The Revenant | Dec 25 Limited, Jan 8 2016 wide | Opening in select IMAX theaters Jan 14th.

[takerowns]

The only two who stood out were Redmayne and Keaton. I'd maybe keep Carrell in, but boot Cumberbatch and Cooper for some combination of Fiennes, Gyllenhaal and Oyelowo.

I'm apprehensive in seeing this film's commercial appeal. It may be a revenge/survival story starring DiCaprio but it is a Inarritu film and Lubezki is DP. It could come out quite esoteric and Oscar bait-y. I hope it isn't, since Inarritu won last year and it isn't what his filmography needs, but we'll see.

just wondering , do u know if this movie is still filming or are they done cuz i know this took forever to film

[kowhite]

just wondering , do u know if this movie is still filming or are they done cuz i know this took forever to film

I think I read they're going back for more.

But...it's so close...they better be almost finished.

[The Futurist]

I hope it's better than Birdman.

Birdman is a movie that's incredibly well acted, written, and damn...the direction...

But God dammit I didn't care for it cause at the end of the day, it's about a bunch of self absorbed narcissists.

I prefer man versus bear.

 

All characters were acting like 10 yo brats, I wanted to sucker punch them all.

[kowhite]

All characters were acting like 10 yo brats, I wanted to sucker punch them all.

Yeah, no doubt.

And I'm sure that was probably the point...but whatever, I still wanted to punch them!

[TStechnij]

I loved Birdman.

[takerowns]

tbh i don't get the fascination with keatons performance , I thought it was good but I don't see whats so amazing about it , i thought Norton was the  better actor in that movie , idk if i am dumb or what

[kowhite]

tbh i don't get the fascination with keatons performance , I thought it was good but I don't see whats so amazing about it , i thought Norton was the  better actor in that movie , idk if i am dumb or what

You're not dumb.

Keaton did good.

Norton was better.

They were all still nonetheless...insufferable. But they played that well!

[TStechnij]

On first watch I thought Norton was the best and was incredibly impressed by Stone.

Keaton's performance is more subtle and I think a harder role to play and he really knocked it out of the park. His balance between internal struggle and external struggle was quite impressively done and he is probably my favorite of last year with Fiennes and Redmayne a close second and third.

After three watches Stone kind of seems both underwritten and overwritten at the same time. Her performance connects well with me because we are similar in some ways. She deserved the nod because it was something new for her.

Edited August 14, 2015 by TStechnij

[kowhite]

On first watch I thought Norton was the best and was incredibly impressed by Stone.

Keaton's performance is more subtle and I think a harder role to play and he really knocked it out of the park. His balance between internal struggle and external struggle was quite impressively done and he is probably my favorite of last year with Fiennes and Redmayne a close second and third.

After three watches Stone kind of seems both underwritten and overwritten at the same time. Her performance connects well with me because we are similar in some ways. She deserved the nod because it was something new for her.

And a reasonable opinion, they all gave stellar performances.

The direction top notch.

And I get why people liked it.

But seriously, I just can't get past the subject matter...I just...couldn't care less about its story.

It says something when you have this film I admire in so many ways, yet...I just can't like it for what it's about. I just don't care.

Reason enough I am in total admiration of the director, yet not...for the movie.

[BadAtGender]

Birdman is a film that inexplicably comes up less than the sum of its parts. All those parts taken individually are awesome, but somehow the entire whole is empty.

[kowhite]

Birdman is a film that inexplicably comes up less than the sum of its parts. All those parts taken individually are awesome, but somehow the entire whole is empty.

Yeah, cause it's about a bunch of asshole actors.

So much good filmmaking...yet I didnt care.

[Dementeleus]

Birdman is a film that inexplicably comes up less than the sum of its parts. All those parts taken individually are awesome, but somehow the entire whole is empty.

 

This is par for the course with Inarritu.

[Goffe]

But God dammit I didn't care for it cause at the end of the day, it's about a bunch of self absorbed narcissists.

you don't think that's great?

Boooooo

[BadAtGender]

This is par for the course with Inarritu.

 

That worries me about this film, then.

[TStechnij]

That worries me about this film, then.

This seems quite different than his past films. I mean, he got Best Picture and Best Director last year, I think that should be a sign to maybe do something different and less awards pandering.

[Goffe]

Inarritu filmography is mostly not good, but I really like Birdman, its ending is brilliant and original.

Edited August 14, 2015 by Goffe

[TStechnij]

I realize all my posts are contradictions of each other.

I have no idea what to think of this. Not a big Leo fan and that may be clouding my judgement.

[BadAtGender]

This seems quite different than his past films. I mean, he got Best Picture and Best Director last year, I think that should be a sign to maybe do something different and less awards pandering.

 

Why would he do anything different? If the goal is to win awards, keep doing the thing that wins awards.

[TStechnij]

Why would he do anything different? If the goal is to win awards, keep doing the thing that wins awards.

Maybe. But it must be tiring to put out the same kind of work every year. I like to think that after a director wins they do different things. This certainly looks different then his last stuff. I mean, it looks more Lubezki and Inarritu.

[Joel M]

Why would he do anything different? If the goal is to win awards, keep doing the thing that wins awards.

 

Most directors are interested in similar themes even if every new story they tackle is completely different than the previous one. I mean Aronofsky could try to make Stuart Little 4 and I bet he'll turn it into an obsessive melodrama about self-dustruction in no time. The thing with Inarritu is that his first four movies don't just share his worldview or his pet themes, they are exactly the same movie to a comical degree, every time a little worse but still the same movie. Even Biutiful that didn't have the 3 different stories structure was the same and worse than all of his previous movies. 

Birdman was his 5th movie but it felt more like his second and Revenant looks distinguished enough to be his "third". It took him a decade to grow out of trying to remake Amores Perros but he made it. 

Also Revenant looks like a movie that will have a much harder time than Birdman to get serious awards consideration. Birdman was every SAG member's wet dream, Revenant looks kind of brutal. I can see it going exactly like Django and WOWS, getting a lot of nominations but never really having a chance at the big one.

Edited August 14, 2015 by Joel M